Are there individuals in your ontology that satisfy this rule? You can
easily try a SQWRL query to see, e.g.,
Parent(?P) ∧Child(?C) ∧ hasChild(?P,?C) → sqwrl:select(?P,?C)
Though, as Thomas said, you do not need SWRL for this.
Martin
drazik wrote:
>I have 2 classes: Parent, and Child. I have an object properly : hasChild ,
>that
>I tried to configure the SWRL following rule:
> Parent(?P) ∧Child(?C) ∧ hasChild(?P,?C) → (hasChild <= 1)(?P)
>I think (hasChild<= 1) is syntactically not supported,
>so I will have to create a named OWL class with the class description
>(hasChild <= 1) attached. Assuming the class is called Contraint, the
> rule will be:
>> Parent(?P) ∧Child(?C) ∧ hasChild(?P,?C) → Contraint(?P)
>but this rule doesn't work ,
>where is the problem ??
>if there is a possibility to express this restriction with protege tel me it
>thanks a lot
>>